Tweet
I have acquired several volumes of this publication and have already started to ocr in some of the articles.
As so often happens as I work through these articles I find reference to other books which I then hunt up. For example this week I found reference to the Sutherland Book which is a 3 volume publication. I've added this to the Clan Sutherland page on the site.
And I also ocr'd in articles on MacGregor and MacLeod.
I might add I had to correct some of the links to this information as am so used to working with .htm files that I completely forgot that as the Clan pages are so old I was then using .html as the page extension and hence the links initially posted were incorrect but fixed now.
I also found a book called "Keltic Researches" By Edward Williams Byron Nocholson (1904) which you can read at http://www.electricscotland.com/books/pdf/keltic.htm
I did ocr in the Preface in which it states...
The history of ancient and early mediaeval times requires to a far greater extent than more recent history the aid of various other sciences, not the least of which is the science of language. And, although the first object of these Studies was to demonstrate to specialists various unrecognized or imperfectly recognized linguistic facts, the importance of those facts in themselves is much less than that of their historical consequences.
The main historical result of this book is the settlement of c the Pictish question or rather of the two Pictish questions. The first of these is ‘What kind of language did the Picts speak?*. The second is ‘Were the Picts conquered by the Scots?
The first has been settled by linguistic and palaeographical methods only : it has been shown that Pictish was a language virtually identical with Irish, differing from that far less than the dialects of some English counties differ from each other. The second has been settled, with very little help from language, by historical and textual methods: it has been made abundantly clear, I think, to any person of impartial and critical mind that the supposed conquest of the Picts by the Scots is an absurd myth.
The Highlander, as we call him—the Albanach as he calls himself in his own Gaelic—is, indeed, in the vast majority of cases simply the modern Pict, and his language modern Pictish. To suppose that the great free people from which he is descended were ever conquered by a body of Irish colonists, and that the language he speaks is merely an Irish colonial dialect, are delusions which, I hope, no one will regret to see finally dispelled.
Alastair
As so often happens as I work through these articles I find reference to other books which I then hunt up. For example this week I found reference to the Sutherland Book which is a 3 volume publication. I've added this to the Clan Sutherland page on the site.
And I also ocr'd in articles on MacGregor and MacLeod.
I might add I had to correct some of the links to this information as am so used to working with .htm files that I completely forgot that as the Clan pages are so old I was then using .html as the page extension and hence the links initially posted were incorrect but fixed now.
I also found a book called "Keltic Researches" By Edward Williams Byron Nocholson (1904) which you can read at http://www.electricscotland.com/books/pdf/keltic.htm
I did ocr in the Preface in which it states...
The history of ancient and early mediaeval times requires to a far greater extent than more recent history the aid of various other sciences, not the least of which is the science of language. And, although the first object of these Studies was to demonstrate to specialists various unrecognized or imperfectly recognized linguistic facts, the importance of those facts in themselves is much less than that of their historical consequences.
The main historical result of this book is the settlement of c the Pictish question or rather of the two Pictish questions. The first of these is ‘What kind of language did the Picts speak?*. The second is ‘Were the Picts conquered by the Scots?
The first has been settled by linguistic and palaeographical methods only : it has been shown that Pictish was a language virtually identical with Irish, differing from that far less than the dialects of some English counties differ from each other. The second has been settled, with very little help from language, by historical and textual methods: it has been made abundantly clear, I think, to any person of impartial and critical mind that the supposed conquest of the Picts by the Scots is an absurd myth.
The Highlander, as we call him—the Albanach as he calls himself in his own Gaelic—is, indeed, in the vast majority of cases simply the modern Pict, and his language modern Pictish. To suppose that the great free people from which he is descended were ever conquered by a body of Irish colonists, and that the language he speaks is merely an Irish colonial dialect, are delusions which, I hope, no one will regret to see finally dispelled.
Alastair
Comment